Re: [council] Finalization of "A Unique, Authoritative Root for the DNS"
- To: "Milton Mueller" <Mueller@syr.edu>
- Subject: Re: [council] Finalization of "A Unique, Authoritative Root for the DNS"
- From: "Joe Sims" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 18:53:25 -0400
- Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, "Karl Auerbach" <karl@CaveBear.com>, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Sender: email@example.com
Milton, not only are your views minority, but your characterizations and
facts are wrong. As Stuart described in detail in the original draft, and
at the public forum meeting in Stockholm, this is a statement of existing
policy, not an attempt to change policy or create new policy. You are free
to disagree, but for some reason it appears that the only way you know how
to disagree is to attack the motives of the other side. This is not an
effective technique, and may at least partially explain why you are so
often in the minority. In addition, the Board in Stockholm authorized
Stuart to finalize and publish this document as a statement of existing
policy; perhaps you were out of the room. If you disagree with the policy,
feel free to seek to change it; all you have to do is to convince enough
others so as to generate consensus support for your position. FWIW, I
think this would be a challenge on this particular subject, where it
appears that the vast majority of those in the community who do not have
adverse economic interests agree with the current policy, but you are
certainly free to try.
Jones Day Reavis & Pogue
51 Louisiana Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20001
Direct Phone: 1.202.879.3863
Direct Fax: 1.202.626.1747
Mobile Phone: 1.703.629.3963
<Mueller@syr.edu To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>
> cc: <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>,
<firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Karl Auerbach" <karl@CaveBear.com>,
Sent by: <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>,
owner-council@dn <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>,
so.org <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
07/09/01 05:59 Subject: [council] Finalization of "A Unique, Authoritative Root for
PM the DNS"
Fellow Name Council members:
Whatever one's opinion of this document's substance,
it is a completely illegitimate exercise. The staff has no
authority to unilaterally declare that something is a policy.
Policy in this matter is quite explicitly the purview of the
DNSO, according to corporate articles and bylaws.
I would like to know on what basis ICANN staff decided to
completely bypass its own DNSO in drafting this so-called
This document was not even voted on by the ICANN Board.
What makes this all the more egregious is that if ICANN
management had respect for its own processes, it would
probably get something very like the same policy through
the DNSO. My own dissenting views are (probably) in the
minority at this point. But apparently staff are so
fearful that its made-up policies cannot stand up to the
light of open discussion in a neutral forum that it has to
bypass any process at all.
Why are you afraid of open debate and discussion of this
issue in a working group? Do you lack confidence in the merit
of your ideas?
>>> Louis Touton <email@example.com> 07/09/01 04:41PM >>>
The paper on "A Unique, Authoritative Root for the DNS", released for
discussion in May, has been finalized based on the various comments and
The preceding e-mail message (including any attachments) contains
information that may be confidential, be protected by the attorney-client
or other applicable privileges, or constitute non-public information. It
is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are
not an intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender by
replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Use,
dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended
recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.